Taxon Clean-Up To Do List

Last updated 3 months ago

EOL takes names and classifications from different content partners and organizes them into taxon concepts represented by EOL taxon pages. For example, have a look at the Names tab of the sperm whale page to see the names and classifications united in this taxon concept. The taxon concepts are created by an algorithm that tries to make sense of a huge amount of name and synonym data, taking into account various complications, e.g., variations in the spelling of author names. But sometimes things go horribly wrong, and EOL ends up with multiple pages for the same species, or several different taxa are inappropriately united in a common taxon concept.

We now have a new tool for master curators that makes it easier to manage taxon concepts on EOL. In this collection, we are keeping track of problematic taxon concepts that need to be either split (i.e., multiple taxa are inappropriately united on the same EOL page) or merged (i.e., there are multiple EOL pages for the same taxon). If you would like to add something to the collection, drop a note in the collection newsfeed below. We will then make you a manager of the collection, so you can add taxa that need to be split or merged. When adding items to this collection, please be sure to add detailed instructions in the annotation. If you request a taxon concept split, list the taxa that should be removed from the current concept and explain your request. Be sure to report both the name, including authority if available, and the provider ("Recognized by") of all taxa that should be moved to a new page. You can find this information in the Names tab of the page you want to split. If you request a taxon concept merge, add all the taxon pages to this collection that should be merged, then add a comment in the annotation of one of them explaining your merge request.

If you have posted something to this collection and it's gone now, the issue has probably been addressed. In that case, you will find the item in the Taxon Clean-Up Tasks Completed collection along with an explanation of what we did to fix the problem. If we have scoped out the issue but couldn't fix the problem right away, we may also have moved your item to the Taxon Clean-Up Tasks With Pending Issues collection or one of its component collections.

Recently visited

There are three EOL pages for this same moth, two under Eumorpha fasciatus and one as Eumorpha fasciata. They're all the same thing and Eumorpha fasciatus seems to be the standard version of the name that is used, so they should be merged under that.

I don't think E. harmsii is the same thing as E. elegans, so the three E. harmsii photos shouldn't be coming out under E. elegans. Under "names", E. harmsii isn't listed as a synonym of E. elegans. Also, if you search online, you'll see both names still used widely in horticulture.

The common name "ristly cave crayfish" is missing the initial "B". Should be removed or marked as untrusted or be corrected.

References:http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/153995/0 — source of the missing "B". IUCN oddly uses a Greek capital beta character instead of a regular Latin B in "Bristly". It looks identical to a regular "B" but leads to errors.

The majority of images and classification schemes under this "Cerion" entry are gastropods (snails) but a couple of the classification schemes (like Species ITIS) are for fungi (ascomycetes) and not for animals. Those need to be moved out.

"Zululand dwarf chamaeleon" is listed as the preferred common name. "Chamaeleon" is the Latin spelling, while in English it is almost always "Chameleon". IUCN (where this name is sourced from) has since shifted its spelling of this entry's common name to the more common English spelling. At least nine other "chamaeleon" entries have also had their spelling changed in the IUCN Red List. Perhaps this will update automatically with another data import from the IUCN?

Has two common names combined into one as its preferred common name ("The Spurred-lip Cypripedium - Ram's Head Lady Slipper"). This is due to an issue with the formatting of the entry in an old version of IUCN's red list. Should have two common names: Spurred-Lip Cypripedium, Ram's Head Lady Slipper

Includes the common name "Copperstripe barb (fb)" The "(fb)" is redundant. It's how the IUCN previously tagged names that came from fishbase. IUCN removed this tag from most of its entries in their 2016-2 release, but they remain in eol.org. Will they disappear by themselves after eol does another import from IUCN?

IUCN uses two-letter "species codes" for some of their entries. I'm not sure what they're for exactly, but they use the "common name" field to store them. And eol.org doesn't filter them out so they end up as weird species names. For example, Zostera caespitosa, has been given the unlikely preferred common name of "Species Code: Zs". There are many others. Try search eol.org for "species code" for more. (Currently gives 55 results)

The common name contains a typo or transcription error. Eiongate should be Elongate. "elongate leaf chameleon" is already listed and should be marked as the "preferred name", while "Eiongate Leaf Chameleon" should be removed or marked as untrusted.

Firstly, it appears to be misspelled by IUCN: bermudensis instead of bermudiensis (missing an -i-). Secondly, the preferred name listed by WoRMS is Bermudagidiella bermudiensis which already has an entry at < http://eol.org/pages/10306749 >.

This entry should probably be merged with http://eol.org/pages/10306749 and both synonyms (Bogidiella bermudensis and Bogidiella bermudiensis) listed there.

All the Iris squalens items come out under Iris japonica, as if the names are synonyms. However, I. japonica is Chinese and I. squalens is Eruopean, and these are entirely different kinds of Irises. Iris squalens either needs to be able to have its own taxon, or to be merged not with I japonica but with one of the related European bearded Irises (like I. variegata). (I. squalens is supposed to be a natural hybrid, but I think cultivated similar-looking hybrids are often included under that name).

"Iridacaea iris" is not a classification or a real scientific name, and doesn't need a page of its own. It is just a couple of nested ranks (Family: Iridaceae Genus: Iris) that were probably used to organize folders of images.

There seem to be 3 different pages for Trifolium pratense (red clover) which need to be merged. One is from the CalPhotos classification, one is from BHL: BioDivLibrary's photostream, and one is what everyone else uses.

There are three EOL pages for this gall wasp, each with different content, because the binomial of this gall wasp has several orthographic variants. Andricus foecundatrix (Hartig, 1840) = Andricus fecundatrix (Hartig, 1840) = Andricus fecundator (Hartig, 1840)

The main taxon name is misspelled. The genus should be Quincula (with a Q) nor Guincula (with a g). OK-- the problem is that the Species ITIS classification has the name misspelled. I changed the preferred classification, which fixed the heading. Is there any way to fix the Species ITIS classification or tell them they have an error? There has never been a genus Guincula, this is just a typo someone made and didn't catch.